Walmart's New Health Food Push: Is It Too Hard to Swallow?
Bonds Are a 'Safe' Investment: A Big Lie Gets Even Bigger
Have I been had? That's how I feel recently about two interviews I conducted on "Mad Money," one with Bruce Carbonari of Fortune Brands (NYSE: FO) (Cramer's Take) and the other with Rick Goings from Tupperware (NYSE: TUP) (Cramer's Take).
Let me say from the outset that these two companies and these two CEOs have been gracious enough to come on my show to talk about their businesses and their prospects and how they would survive in tough times.
Both have what I call accidentally high yields. Both are upbeat people and like to see the good in their businesses. They are not "downbeat" -- perhaps even when they should be.
That's the real question at hand. Both Carbonari and Goings recently professed some pretty strong beliefs that they could ride through this period with what I would call minor damage, in Fortune Brands' case because it has some noncyclical businesses like liquor, and in Tupperware's case because they have counter-recessionary traits like people needing a second job and so they turn to Tupperware selling.
These stories have not panned out.
Fortune Brands' quarter was awful, along all product lines. Carbonari might disagree with that analysis, but I am not fighting Mr. Market on it. The businesses just aren't holding up well and I don't see the big share take that Carbonari says is occurring.
Goings was on the show just last week saying good things about the future. Last week! Then Tuesday he gave guidance that was so much more downbeat than what he said on my show that I now think I was just plain had.
I don't think either man failed to tell the truth. I do think that Carbonari was just too bullish given the downturn.
But Goings? Let's just say I haven't figured out what happened yet. All I know is that it just doesn't smell right to me.
And people got hurt listening to how upbeat he was a week ago vs. where he was two days ago. Maybe I leave it at that. For now.
Jim Cramer is co-founder and chairman of TheStreet.com. He contributes daily market commentary for TheStreet.com's sites and serves as an adviser to the company's CEO. At the time of publication, Cramer had no positions in the stocks mentioned.
Goldman Earnings Sink After Buffett Dividend
Johnson & Johnson's Income Falls 23%
Burberry Shares Leap on Sales Update
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
2-05-2009 @ 10:40AM
MaryLou Michelin said...
What is going on with GE? Why is Jeff Immelt still there?
2-05-2009 @ 11:08AM
BHarrison said...
I find it somewhat refreshing that Cramer takes the time and makes the effort to put these matters into perspective . . . that is what the American people need.
We all want to be "optimistic and upbeat"; but we also have to be realistic about the overall situation.
Personally, I think that the markets and funds are doomed to shrink appreciably because of the lack of INTEGRITY in the financial reports, and Congress' FAILURE to issue proudent and reasonable REGULATIONS and to setup effective oversights to establish and maintain the INTEGRITY of the FIs and the corporations.
No rational and prudent investor is going to invest in a manipulated, CORRUPT, and declining market, are they? Yeah the "insider" short sellers and other "insiders" will try to keep the trading going; but for most of us small investors, we've been defrauded too much already. "Cash in hand" is a lot better than questionable investments when no one knows what is REALLY going on in the FIs, the corporations or the markets/funds.
When "insider" professional fund managers prefer to buy "zero interests T-Bills" versus investing in the markets, we "little guys finally get the message" . . . it is a FOOL's market.
2-05-2009 @ 11:34AM
paul s said...
It's called BS, Jim. Guys like Goings are filled with it. They have no respect for people like you, never mind your viewers. It is probably more like contempt. He might think you are just one of the cheerleaders, not a player on his team. Next time ask the hard questions and make people like him squirm. If nothing else we, your viewers, will be entertained.
2-05-2009 @ 1:13PM
BHarrison said...
A REAL but "revolutionary" SOLUTION for some of our economic problems: While they say that the wealth of the upper 5% or 3% is critical for our economic recover, THAT SIMPLY IS NO LONGER TRUE.
What we now have is the Federal government injecting "taxpayer monies" (deficit spending) to stimulate our economy . . . the "wealthiest of the wealthy" are NOT doing anything to help our economy that THEY have decimated with their FINANCIAL FRAUDS. And, in essence, they are getting the Federal government to financially prop up their bankrupted corporations and financial institutions.
Their "safety net" is that they have gotten the nvestments of Americans (retirees, etc.) mired in their fraudulent scams . . . and our CORRUPT Congress has tacitly allowed and enabled all of that.
As they say, increasing the taxes on the wealthy will only discourage their investment in business enterprises. Well, where are the wealthy going to put their wealth for safety, security, and "growth"? So far, the Federal "bailout" has ONLY helped the wealthy individuals for the most part.
Their "insurance" has been in getting the investments of the American people (retirees, etc.) entangled into their corrupt and fraudulent business enterprises ("derivatives", etc.). You can't take down the FRAUDSTERS wtihout hurting a lot of "average Americans".
The ultra wealthy already have their "wealth"; and the considerations are only for taxing "future profits", right? Well, desperate times call for desperate mesures . . . and horrific FRAUDS call for drastic actions also.
So, what if Congress passes taxation on all wealths in excess of certain amounts? Yeah, that may sound "unAmerican"; but so is all of the FRAUD that has been committed against the American people.
Congress has certainly reacted and been able to "redistribute the disastrous losses from these mega-frauds to the American taxpayers, right? So, where is it any different that Congress recoup a lot of those "losses" that were actually "profits" to the ultra wealthy? That would just be "adjusting the top" for the "adjustments that have been made at the "bottom' ALREADY.
This tax revenue could be used to offset the "deficit spending" that has been used to "bailout" the CORRUPT corporations to date.
No, it isn't a perfect solution by nay menas;but it at least manages to "re-balance" the inequities of the wealthy versus the poor. later, as the economic situation settles out, the government's interests in the corporations could be sold (bought back by the corporations/ stockholders, which would boost the economy somewhat.)
Yeah, it is just a radical thought; but something like this needs to occur in order to re-balance our economic society.
2-05-2009 @ 5:41PM
rpgpa said...
Bharrison. your comments rock. No pauliana BS. Reality. Reality that people ignore or are just too gullible not to believe. You sound like the ole George Carlin standup titled "who owns the country". you must have watched it.!!
2-05-2009 @ 6:13PM
peterbritto said...
Jim, I think you should change the name of your show from Mad Money to Bull Money. I watched you for more than fifteen minutes last evening saying SKF (the double on the financials going down) should be banned from investors speculating on it but you did not mention anything about the double long on financials (UYG). What kind of biased show are you putting out to investors. Maybe the SEC should BAN you for not giving full disclosure to uninformed viewers.